Hi ho, hi ho, its off to vote we go (on Nov 24)

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by fringe_dweller

lil' Johnny started it!

I am but just a humble reactionary, fighting fire with fire, not an idealogue fundamentalist!
they are making the rules! I have to play within their framework?

sooo does that mean i cant even hate collingwood!?

I have never been in a union voluntarily (or a member of any party), i was in the notorious BLF (remember those days?) for a while, as that was the only way to get the job i wanted, and I was never impressed with the uninterested self serving biker officials I encountered daily. And also I hated the musicians union with a passion once upon a time back in the 80's, they were an outrageous scam.
But unfortunately, I still think they are a neccassary evil in a modern egalatarian society. as leaving everything entirely up to market forces (ie put the fox in charge of the chickens) is just the flipside of rampant unionism - whatever happened to the centre based politics? i never thought i would see the conservatives become so radical! it used to be the left that was the radicals! lol
I feel sorry for all the small l liberals voters, they must be feeling set adrift

Small L's have been manipulate to allow what is before them... It is unfortunate as they were once thought to be the thinkers and yet now they do little to rein in the hate that the party builds upon so often.

alex

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Alex is quite right. Why hate when you can do something better ...like..... cast your vote

[ballaratdragons (Ken)]

I'm going to Vote for . . .



hmmm, my keyboard doesn't seem to work on the keys I need

[xelasnave]

I recall a movie... the memory is dim but I recall... "none of the above" was the call.
Although I dont subscribe to a religious persuasion I can not help but think maybe JC was on the money.
I reject the hate and fear what would happen if we all followed JC's teaching.
alex

[fringe_dweller]

I respect were your coming from Alex, I wish more people thought like you mate
and I count myself lucky that I live in a country were I can shoot my mouth off and bad mouth/question political figures/groups and the worst that probably can happen is people think your idiot tosser/wrong whatever.
But I understand amongst some new legislation that JH has in store, if re-elected, probably rubberstamped in 5 minutes with little time for scrutiny like most stuff is lately with the abused senate majority, is something about comments like mine on blogs and forums criticising the government(s) will be an act of sedition - so I am enjoying it while it lasts!
i think also criticising a vendor or business/lots of stuff on the net will be against the law.
and your right I am angry/hating, i am angry at the voters who gave these nutters carte blanche for a few pieces of silver, total control of the senate (wthell were they thinkin - were they even thinking?) and strangley trusted them to deliver on undeliverable promises, fell for the most inane bs i have evr heard in my life, and we all have to live with the consequences. blind freddy could tell what was comin, but no not the australian electorate.
i have heard that democracy is overrated, well after this little experience of misanthropic personality cult totalatarian dictatorship, i am shaken as to aussie values, i dont trust em anymore
its not my vote i'm worried about Geoff

[xelasnave]

Well there is method in my madness..I hide behind an image of being crackpot in the hope that I am considered harmless... and I am.. I certainly never feel so passionate that I would take any action what so ever... I present my views so those who don't get it can write me off... I do not wish to be their target..they will be better chasing someone who will throw real spokes in their wheels.

I study history and history explains so much...

We are in for a very tuff time for various reasons. Restriction of free speech is a forerunner to involvement in war..war is necessary to maintain economies.. we are being programed for war ... we will have a big war sooner than most believe.
So with that I can be classed as a nut... and those who may on first impression feel I may present a threat can write me off... I like it that way.

And in fact I now enjoy a level where I understand why things must be the way I see them... for all the nonsense good can be found simply in the concentration of resources ... I wont go on it would take a couple of books I will not write to explain what I mean.

But we must prepare for class hatred over the time we must wait to see who gets the top job.

I really love the system it is so predictable... and of course personal freedoms will go... and still murders will get "get out of jail cards" while foreign policies are dictated by a mentality that guided the crusades...they were presented as hate but it was always about gold and land.

That's the way things go I don't see it as good or bad ..things just are.


alex



alex

[AJames]

Odd observations and some questions.

Why does the Labour Party call itself the Labor Party without the "u"?

Even my spell checker writing this post says it is with the "u", and I thought in Australia we use the British version of the spelling.

If the word "colour" is correct instead of the Americanised "color", then why not "Labour" instead of their usage of "Labor"?

Is it all an American plot, or does Johnny and Kev think they're running for the Aussie Pres?

Secondly. If we live in a so-called free democracy, and we are supposed yo have free will to choose what we want to do, then why is it compulsory for every Aussie to vote on polling day?

Thirdly, if you want to post a postal vote, why are you expected to add and pay for a postage stamp when you register to get a ballot paper? Yet when you get the ballot paper and send it back it is postage paid?

AJames

[AJames]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

I really love the system it is so predictable... and of course personal freedoms will go... and still murders will get "get out of jail cards" while foreign policies are dictated by a mentality that guided the crusades...they were presented as hate but it was always about gold and land.
That's the way things go I don't see it as good or bad ..things just are.
alex

Yeah your absolutely right.
But the other biggest restriction in Australia of all, which you don't mention, is the introduction of the archaic sedition laws due the "war". You speak against the government and you could end up serving more time in jail than for just murdering someone. Surely this is the best way to legally silence someone.
Perversely, while the Johnny and Kev are going hammer and tong with their phoney tit-for-tat dirty politics, smear and - surely their own bad behaviours are already putting the Parliament into disrepute. Isn't this also just another example of sedition?

[The reality with the dirty politics at the moment, perhaps SEDITION isn't the real problem here. Perhaps what we REALLY need for them all is some SEDATION ! Perhaps then they would not be acting like Naughty School Boys and Girls and embarrassing all of us?]

AJames

DEFINITION of Sedition: Conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

[xelasnave]

The language evolves often under the influence of other nations we deal with...it was not long ago that English took in a host of words from the French...because they were the rulers of the English...go back only 600 years and you would not be understood if you wanted to have a chat in England...in fact the number of words that are French in origin is staggering...

we do not now say ...Why call this mutton when clearly it is sheep...assuming sheep is a real English word.

New words appear everyday and so the language evolves... why hang onto a determination that there should be no change when it can not be stopped.

We can not but help to be influenced be a nation that is so entwined in our culture.

As to spelling it evolves also ... I used colour and now use color even if I am color blind... and what a poor phrase that is I am not blind and simply see colour different to others..maybe I see more maybe I see less.

Why even call the Labour/Labor party such when clearly they also have evolved to represent a broader more diverse group of interests... developers are hardly ones notion of "Labour" or "Labor" yet they provide I suspect the bulk of contribution to that party..and to the other party.

It has only to do with vested interests and their attempt to gain the edge.

We make a fundamental incorrect assumption that democracy caters to the notion of free..it carters to minority and such is subject to corruption by minority... but really if our opinions mattered parties would not claim mandates as if they were clearly understood by the electorate and were fundamental in the choice one makes when giving ones vote and control by "the people".

Parties tell us crap with the real plans well hidden on the basis that we are too ignorant to understand the "wider picture".

The Greeks ..the installers of democracy extended democracy only to a privileged few really yet from their approach we write in the notion of freedom.
One is only free to support the general drift of public opinion step outside that and you will find little tolerance of freedom.

Free is something we think we have and in some regard we do but finally it is the law and the norms that restrict absolute freedom.

As to stamps etc that is just the way the mop flops really.

alex

[AJames]

In the arguments towards any defence of politics and the idea of representative democracy, is still always is based that their actual need and existence is held solely in the hands of the people. This is the grand illusion.
As the idea of democracies comes from the original Athenian Greeks, where the people voted on their elected officials and on many social issues using black and white coloured stones, which were placed in a large pot. Simply the majority would prevail - everyone equal (or guilty) for the decision. The problem in a short time became corruption, where artificial votes were manufactured or individuals would vote many times.
It is interesting that the concept of democracy, we have the basic democratic right for all individuals to influence the future for themselves and even towards the whole species - only to find change is really based more on the decisions of only a fractional minority of elected officials at the immense cost of sacrificing real input into the process of the future direction and course of the democracy.
In my view, the central problem with today's democracy(s) is the huge reality gap between the elected officials and the people who have elect them. For me the given representation by any election process is a two-edged sword. Only a few will represent the whole, but once they are voted in, they become the prime sources (and targets) of the conflict, because they are hidden away from the real desires of those who voted for them, and are completely isolated for those that voted against them.
It has always seemed odd to me that anyone not believing in these basic premises will be quickly swept under the carpet - immediately labelled as; Ie. A communist, socialist, extremist or troublemaker. Yet it will always first be the politician, who in defence of his politics, will immediately point-out the diametric view, stating the worst case scenario, being extremes like anarchy, political decay and loss of a particular way of life. In Australia's case this is the presumed demise of the whole Westminster System.
Such views are clearly portrayed this way because any kind of political change would likely transfer the ambitions and power base held by the incumbent politicians (and their parties), and place more direct control and choice among the electors. Defence for the established political systems given by many parliamentary bodies (or any elected body), is that many decisions are often either needed to be made quickly (Ie. Economics, natural disasters or wars, etc.) or that some matters must be decided in the whole population's best interest (Crime, health, ethics, etc.).
Conflicting with this is that political power cannot be held in perpetuity. For politicians to survive, decisions also have to be towards their power base - the party, the branch of the party and the people - else they cannot implement there policies nor be re-elected. Unfortunately, the paradigm of the party-based system also means the person in not the "best man" or "best skilled" for the job, but who happened to be savvy enough or had the most charisma to get nominated to contest the election. Thus another failure of democracy is that many of the very best possible representatives who could contribute more for their country, have overrun by those that are either power grabbing perennial politicians or nominees from a sometimes biassed party-political process. Again this process overrides control directly by the people.
What worries me is that in Australia, few are even willing to debate or challenge the current policies. Ie. The sedition laws or restrictions of freedom, liberty or even assembly.
We are all quite literally happy to "bow-down" to the dictates of the few we do elect, based only on the deluded premise that those we elect will always act in our best interest - like an adult holding the hand of a child as they cross the road. It always seems that when the voters get complacent it always follows that there is an erosion of people's democracy and freedom - governments imposing their will for the "best interests of the population". The government views this - if they are not interested we must be doing the right thing - so we will go a little further.
In reality though, more often than not, voting really only is "bowing down" to the policies following the party-line, favouring the dictates of those who are powerful enough to persuade or influence a group of like-minded people to follow certain policies. Although it is quite true that people are free to join parties, most never do, either because they often feel they do not have the capacity to formulate ideas, or that they don't have the time or the means of having influence to change things for the better - either for their community, party or country.
Such two-levelled democracy greatly weakens the individual's ability to change.
Another second significant failure is the wrongly implemented concept of the referendums - rules to change any policy. These referendums were supposed to enable changes to the Society or their rules, but have been neutered by requiring two-thirds and majority, flagrant division on party lines, and a population not being able to ask or decide on the question. Referendums instead of being are ultimately controlled by the parliament, and this is made worse by the politicians knowing how to exploit it. Ie. John Howard (and the Liberals) controlled the two referendum questions in November 1999 by asking the divisive and indirect question of some republican model ; instead of the vox populi question "Should Australia become a republic?" - then develop models of its adoption - and not the other way around.
One of the modern suggestions to solving all these problems is the so-called neo-democracies, a future availed in the uses of information and computer technology. In this world elections, referendums and polls are made by computer input via a unique personal identification signature - either by some password, identicard, using the individuals DNA coding or iris/fingerprint matching the voter to the vote. Advances in technology have the ability of making the process foolproof, but requires dedication by the Government to impliement it. As more of the population become proficient in using computers and media, they become more able to interact with the election process and can make real decisions towards the political process.

At least they have done this for the visually impaired voters.

Yet to the question; "Why call this mutton when clearly it is sheep..." works on many levels. However, the real answer here is that most of the 'sheep' are really 'lambs' going to the slaughter once very three years (and only when the ringmaster decides...


AJames

[xelasnave]

Mr AJames you are a very wise man.. be careful I think they have a law in mind for your kind.
Congratualtions on a very fine post.. brilliant from any view point.
alex

[fringe_dweller]

Originally Posted by AJames

Odd observations and some questions.

Why does the Labour Party call itself the Labor Party without the "u"?

Even my spell checker writing this post says it is with the "u", and I thought in Australia we use the British version of the spelling.

If the word "colour" is correct instead of the Americanised "color", then why not "Labour" instead of their usage of "Labor"?

Is it all an American plot, or does Johnny and Kev think they're running for the Aussie Pres?

I think it was in the early 20th century, when there was a huge 'everything american' was in fashion, as it periodically is here, the brits are still 'labour

Originally Posted by AJames

Secondly. If we live in a so-called free democracy, and we are supposed yo have free will to choose what we want to do, then why is it compulsory for every Aussie to vote on polling day?

I find this arguement extremly offensive and disingenous when I hear it constantly sprouted by neocons and the general conservatives, why is it such a burning issue to them, surely theres more important things? I dont hear people complaining they have to sit for their drivers licence, register their dogs, pay the rego on their car - why does the right wing side of politics constantly harp and dog whistle about this, why coz the right wingers are the biggest nutters and most passionate about control, and are always garaunteed to vote (not to mention the fundie bring on the apocaplypse so i can go to heavan religous nutters instructing/directing/ordering there flocks to do so, while the lazy handout commies are nursing their hangovers witness the US, more people voted for american idol than the national elections!

Originally Posted by AJames

Thirdly, if you want to post a postal vote, why are you expected to add and pay for a postage stamp when you register to get a ballot paper? Yet when you get the ballot paper and send it back it is postage paid?

AJames

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Why even call the Labour/Labor party such when clearly they also have evolved to represent a broader more diverse group of interests... developers are hardly ones notion of "Labour" or "Labor" yet they provide I suspect the bulk of contribution to that party..and to the other party.

you could say why are the liberals called that!? when they are anything but 'liberal' in the US sense of the word

Originally Posted by AJames

In the arguments towards any defence of politics and the idea of representative democracy, is still always is based that their actual need and existence is held solely in the hands of the people. This is the grand illusion.
As the idea of democracies comes from the original Athenian Greeks, where the people voted on their elected officials and on many social issues using black and white coloured stones, which were placed in a large pot. Simply the majority would prevail - everyone equal (or guilty) for the decision. The problem in a short time became corruption, where artificial votes were manufactured or individuals would vote many times.
It is interesting that the concept of democracy, we have the basic democratic right for all individuals to influence the future for themselves and even towards the whole species - only to find change is really based more on the decisions of only a fractional minority of elected officials at the immense cost of sacrificing real input into the process of the future direction and course of the democracy.
In my view, the central problem with today's democracy(s) is the huge reality gap between the elected officials and the people who have elect them. For me the given representation by any election process is a two-edged sword. Only a few will represent the whole, but once they are voted in, they become the prime sources (and targets) of the conflict, because they are hidden away from the real desires of those who voted for them, and are completely isolated for those that voted against them.
It has always seemed odd to me that anyone not believing in these basic premises will be quickly swept under the carpet - immediately labelled as; Ie. A communist, socialist, extremist or troublemaker. Yet it will always first be the politician, who in defence of his politics, will immediately point-out the diametric view, stating the worst case scenario, being extremes like anarchy, political decay and loss of a particular way of life. In Australia's case this is the presumed demise of the whole Westminster System.
Such views are clearly portrayed this way because any kind of political change would likely transfer the ambitions and power base held by the incumbent politicians (and their parties), and place more direct control and choice among the electors. Defence for the established political systems given by many parliamentary bodies (or any elected body), is that many decisions are often either needed to be made quickly (Ie. Economics, natural disasters or wars, etc.) or that some matters must be decided in the whole population's best interest (Crime, health, ethics, etc.).
Conflicting with this is that political power cannot be held in perpetuity. For politicians to survive, decisions also have to be towards their power base - the party, the branch of the party and the people - else they cannot implement there policies nor be re-elected. Unfortunately, the paradigm of the party-based system also means the person in not the "best man" or "best skilled" for the job, but who happened to be savvy enough or had the most charisma to get nominated to contest the election. Thus another failure of democracy is that many of the very best possible representatives who could contribute more for their country, have overrun by those that are either power grabbing perennial politicians or nominees from a sometimes biassed party-political process. Again this process overrides control directly by the people.
What worries me is that in Australia, few are even willing to debate or challenge the current policies. Ie. The sedition laws or restrictions of freedom, liberty or even assembly.
We are all quite literally happy to "bow-down" to the dictates of the few we do elect, based only on the deluded premise that those we elect will always act in our best interest - like an adult holding the hand of a child as they cross the road. It always seems that when the voters get complacent it always follows that there is an erosion of people's democracy and freedom - governments imposing their will for the "best interests of the population". The government views this - if they are not interested we must be doing the right thing - so we will go a little further.
In reality though, more often than not, voting really only is "bowing down" to the policies following the party-line, favouring the dictates of those who are powerful enough to persuade or influence a group of like-minded people to follow certain policies. Although it is quite true that people are free to join parties, most never do, either because they often feel they do not have the capacity to formulate ideas, or that they don't have the time or the means of having influence to change things for the better - either for their community, party or country.
Such two-levelled democracy greatly weakens the individual's ability to change.
Another second significant failure is the wrongly implemented concept of the referendums - rules to change any policy. These referendums were supposed to enable changes to the Society or their rules, but have been neutered by requiring two-thirds and majority, flagrant division on party lines, and a population not being able to ask or decide on the question. Referendums instead of being are ultimately controlled by the parliament, and this is made worse by the politicians knowing how to exploit it. Ie. John Howard (and the Liberals) controlled the two referendum questions in November 1999 by asking the divisive and indirect question of some republican model ; instead of the vox populi question "Should Australia become a republic?" - then develop models of its adoption - and not the other way around.

coz he's 'mean and tricky' and takes the electorate for mugs, he has been right so far

Originally Posted by AJames

One of the modern suggestions to solving all these problems is the so-called neo-democracies, a future availed in the uses of information and computer technology. In this world elections, referendums and polls are made by computer input via a unique personal identification signature - either by some password, identicard, using the individuals DNA coding or iris/fingerprint matching the voter to the vote. Advances in technology have the ability of making the process foolproof, but requires dedication by the Government to impliement it. As more of the population become proficient in using computers and media, they become more able to interact with the election process and can make real decisions towards the political process.

At least they have done this for the visually impaired voters.

AJames

strangley that would involve the re-invention of the australia card by stealth, and they have in in the offing, but is on the backburner till after the election i believe - but your right, that would take the i cant drag my lazy arse off to the polling booth every 3 years (should be 4) crowd i got more important things than paying respect to what thousands of people died and struggled for in my name - oh but I can go to anzac day ceremomies!

I agree with alex Your damn good AJames impressive!

[fringe_dweller]

not to mention voting isnt actually compulsory - turning up to the pollinbg booth and getting your name ticked off is of course - just join a fundie cult - and you can get exemption? just ask leapin' johhny tracksuit, a few kickbacks no worries apocolypse on its way!

[tornado33]

Originally Posted by avandonk

I was handing out how to vote cards some years ago. And I pointed out to to my opposite 'enemy' party worker that the ballot boxes are cardboard and the 'lock' a cable tie. The poll workers were all diligent and the whole count at the booth I was at could be seen by anyone who wanted to. This really shows how healthy our democracy is. It is easy to be cynical. It is much harder to create and build for the future.

There was no implied violence or guns, no deaths etc that do plague some other 'democracies.'

We are indeed fortunate that we can cast our vote with no more than annoying election campaigns. So it is our duty to think carefully and vote for the party or person of your preference.

If you don't like the quality of the candidates then consider standing yourself. Or support someone you think is better.

It is no good complaining, get involved if you want to make a difference.

It makes for a much healthier democracy.

Bert

Well said Bert. My family and I will make the 200 metre trip to our local Polling Place to vote without worring about being shot, or blown up, the worst we have to worry about is running the gauntlet of folks handing out "how to vote" papers.
Actually a mate of mine is planning to run for the seat of Charlton, though he will need to get his skates on and get all registered and signed up.
Scott

[fringe_dweller]

the eternal struggle, yin yang - just keep rotating the major parties folks, thats all I want - nice healthy democracy

I was wrong when i said i havent lived in personality cult before, twice in fact, once when younger in qld joh bjelke peterson era, which this federal era is starting to remind me a lot of - you know police state, erosion of civil liberties, you could get arrested for having a beard at one stage if i recall correctly,
I hear the same defense of such a type of government 'well he gets things done' while pointing to rampant develpments skyscrapers ect. i'm sure in 1930's germany they said the same thing, good ol adolf, 'he gets things done' cept he didnt get the brown paper bag?
and i lived in the Uk at the end of the thatcher era, and i recon WC is JH's poll tax, hopefully

[tornado33]

I should mention that Mr Howard turned down an offer for Australia to be admitted into the European Southern Observatory, giving us access to the Very Large telescope. Thats right , even though it would only cost a few million, to get access to the biggest telescope currently on Earth, now gone, thats sad.
Scott

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by tornado33

I should mention that Mr Howard turned down an offer for Australia to be admitted into the European Southern Observatory, giving us access to the Very Large telescope. Thats right , even though it would only cost a few million, to get access to the biggest telescope currently on Earth, now gone, thats sad.
Scott

mmm well I guess I could hate him for that... but I wont... such a turn down when all wonder how to get the community more science focused seems strange even to me...

But they know best... still we dont want our tax give back stopped..its all about giving Australians a fair share of the kitty... we have some cash lets blow it on stimulating the economy so interest rates will go up and the increase in prices can be offset by that handout...

I think I understand it now.

I was listening to the radio and it came up that someone had placed their vote up for sale..it was raised ..its this legal..the expert said it was illegal.
Another caller questioned...

If it is illegal to sell your vote why is it that it is not illegal that a party can buy our vote...

I dont know but it seems votes are being bought with the nice handout of money on would have thought could be used to fix some little things... hospitals maybe... but what do I know...they know best.

Still I dont hate them or the other side without hate one may have a chance of seeing ones own side has some faults that could be reasonably addressed one would hope.

Still why for the sake of a couple of million could we not take up that offer...
I could handle it if the money was spend on more pressing matters but surely the cash flow directed to Government adds for a week or so could have had us using the scope and associating ourselves with the cutting edge...
I know they are going to announce that we are building our own big scope...

alex

[ving (David)]

vote one!
vote jesus!

[xelasnave]

amen
alex